On Thursday 13 September 2007, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Well that'd be nice, but I don't see anywhere that that happens. AFAICT
> the acquire we do in the first coredump callback is the first the SPU
> contexts know about their PPE process dying. And spufs is still live, so
> I think we definitely
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 10:47 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 September 2007, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 17:43 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > This patch adds DEFINE_SPUFS_ATTRIBUTE(), a wraper around
> > > DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE which does the specified loc
On Wednesday 12 September 2007, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 17:43 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > This patch adds DEFINE_SPUFS_ATTRIBUTE(), a wraper around
> > DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE which does the specified locking for the get
> > routine for us.
> >
> > Unfortunately we n
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 17:43 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> This patch adds DEFINE_SPUFS_ATTRIBUTE(), a wraper around
> DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE which does the specified locking for the get
> routine for us.
>
> Unfortunately we need two get routines (a locked and unlocked version) to
> support th
This patch adds DEFINE_SPUFS_ATTRIBUTE(), a wraper around
DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE which does the specified locking for the get
routine for us.
Unfortunately we need two get routines (a locked and unlocked version) to
support the coredump code. This patch hides one of those (the locked version)
ins
5 matches
Mail list logo